New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 09:39am Sep 1, 2001 EST (#8288 of 8292)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Of course we should pay our veterans benefits -- and spend anything the US needs for its security.

gisterme , you say

" let me encourage the part of you that thinks that some policies are being well crafted...this is a difficult world and we're all in it no matter what our personal views may be."

Thanks for that - - I'm taking what you say seriously. And working to respond in a pro-active way.

You and I disagree in some spots, but I am just as concerned about the security needs of the United States as you are. Maybe more concerned, as far as action goes -- I want a US military that actually serves US needs, in the world, technical, political and tactical, as it actually is.

The interests of the US and the rest of the world, including Russia and China, ought NOT to be in conflict. We should look for, and find, "win-win" configurations.

They are there to be found.

To find them, and achieve them, we need to get past some dynamically unstable, and dangerous "everything for me -- nothing for you" patterns (going either way) and also get past some arrangements that involve unsatisfactory and unnecessary compromises, involving needs that all parties need to have, and deserve to have fully satisfied.

I'm doing a lot of searching of this thread, which involves a lot of discussion of these issues.

Full nuclear disarmament, and the barriers to it, have been much discussed here.

rshowalter - 09:40am Sep 1, 2001 EST (#8289 of 8292)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Watched the movie SUPERMAN on Turner Classic Movies last night. The REASONS to want missile defense, or to find other ways to absolutely minimize nuclear risks at all levels -- are certainly compelling.

We need to adress these needs, among others, in ways that can work.

rshowalter - 10:14am Sep 1, 2001 EST (#8290 of 8292)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

On June 5, about 2/3 of the way through the list of his postings on this thread, almarst quit the forum. ... MD4520 almarst-2001 6/5/01 6:27pm

I'm glad he reconsidered, and has continued communication here. But his reasons for quitting then are still relevant now, and I think some of the things said then may bear rereading.

Because full nuclear disarmament, and barriers to it, were being seriously discussed.
MD4517 almarst-2001 6/5/01 3:44pm

With reasons for concern, and concern about communication, understood.
MD4516 rshowalter 6/5/01 1:31pm

And that discussion has continued since, with almarst , and with gisterme.

Real reasons for anger, and unresolved pain, are involved with these matters. In a situation where "apologies" or "extenuating circumstaces" come hard, both for senders and recievers.
MD4518 rshowalter 6/5/01 4:44pm

rshowalter - 10:17am Sep 1, 2001 EST (#8291 of 8292)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Here is a reference by almarst , which reflects his views, about Wolfowitz, that I think ought to be considered, as something that concerns him, and may concern Russians, whether it is balanced and fair of not.

MD1274 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?224@184.qqArapv6ulH^2360078@354441@.f0ce57b

MD1278 almarst-2001 3/21/01 9:03pm ... MD1279 rshowalter 3/21/01 9:19pm

MD8270 rshowalter 8/31/01 3:14pm ... expresses somewhat related concerns about the

NUNN-WOLFOWITZ TASK FORCE REPORT: INDUSTRY "BEST PRACTICES" REGARDING EXPORT COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS http://164.109.59.52/library/pdf/nunnwolfowitz.pdf July 25, 2000

We need to look at patterns, now very well entrenched, and ornately defended, that classify "win-win" adjustments out of existence.

rshowalter - 10:21am Sep 1, 2001 EST (#8292 of 8292)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

One possibility might be parallel tracks for looking for solutions.

There may be good reasons for continuing with old patterns, if only because people often feel that it is "better to deal with the devil you know, than the devil you don't.."

All the same, it would be possible, without contradiction, to look for real win-win situations, in parallel, on a dry run but adequately staffed and serious basis.

The stakes are high enough to justify that effort, and the costs would be tiny in comparison to the potential benefits. This thread has been intended as a "dry run" opening the way to that "dry run."

The idea has been that win win solutions might actually be worked out, fleshed out, and explained, clearly enough to present to the leaders and staffs of the nation states involved.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense